Court dismisses petition challenging penalty for failing to address pending RTI appeals, emphasizing statutory obligations of public offices.
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has upheld a penalty imposed on a public servant for failing to comply with the statutory duties under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed a writ petition filed by Sri. Shivakumar C.L., challenging the penalty of Rs. 25,000 levied by the Karnataka Information Commission due to non-compliance with RTI obligations.
The petitioner, who assumed charge as Secretary of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) in May 2025, was held accountable for the inaction on an RTI appeal originally filed in February 2023. The court emphasized that the responsibilities of the First Appellate Authority under the RTI Act are attached to the office rather than the individual. Thus, once Shivakumar assumed the role, he became responsible for addressing the pending appeal.
Despite being given multiple opportunities to address the issue, including proceedings held on several dates in 2025, there was no representation from the petitioner's side. Consequently, the Commission imposed a penalty and directed immediate compliance with the RTI request in January 2026. The petitioner argued that the defaults occurred before his tenure and that he instructed compliance soon after taking office. However, the court found these arguments unconvincing, noting that the petitioner failed to take timely and effective action upon assuming his responsibilities.
The court reiterated the importance of the obligations attached to statutory offices like the First Appellate Authority under the RTI Act. It stated that non-compliance and absence of diligence in discharging statutory duties justify penalties and disciplinary actions, as they undermine the legislative intent of promoting transparency and accountability in governance.
The judgment serves as a reminder that public authorities must facilitate transparency and accountability, as envisioned under the RTI Act. The Karnataka High Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory duties and the potential consequences of failing to do so.
Bottom line:-
The First Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act is a statutory office, and the responsibilities attached to it are not personal but travel with the office. Inaction or non-compliance with statutory duties, even by a successor, cannot be condoned, especially when it undermines the legislative intent of promoting transparency and accountability.
Statutory provision(s): Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 19, 20
Sri. Shivakumar C.L. v. State Information Commissioner, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2929701
